If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Very interesting on the Gordon setters. I would love to see similar commitment from breeders and clubs with Cavaliers, to get those older dogs scanned, as this is such a critical and informative area of research right now–trying to understand how and why some dogs go on to develop problems with syringomyelia and CM, while others do not, or only have minor issues. Without those dogs forthcoming, there are just enormous gaps in information that could help push the genome project forward significantly and help to eventually produce that DNA test. It was clearly a simpler issue to resolve with Gordons, because it must've been a simple genetic trait and hence easier to identify and easier to create a test for, rather than a complex one, as with syringomyelia– but to my mind, the fact that syringomyelia is complex is exactly the reason that this breed in particular, needs its breeders to work in a coordinated and concerted and well-funded way to try to find answers before the breed is no longer viable.

I found the article quite interesting and sad that one would be treated that way. However what stood out was when I clicked on the article where the comment was mentioned.

I could not believe that she said this:

"Sheila Atter wrote: started with Cavalier King Charles Spaniels, one of the most popular pet breeds, but one that is beset with serious health problems. On the day that I checked, the result was very encouraging. There were 12 advertisements for puppies from accredited breeders, all of whom had at least two accolades, most had all three and one had the accolade of excellence as well. I thought that was a very gratifying result, and hopefully it reflects the efforts made by serious breeders to face up to and start to eradicate the well-publicised problems in that breed. But looking at another toy breed, the results were not so encouraging."

Ummm... did not know the only test to be on an listed as an accredited breeder for cavaliers is EYES! Wow! Leaving out SM, what about hearts? I don't know any breeder that would say MVD is not a problem in the breed. I hear so much about the CM/SM breeding scheme but what about hearts? I know I read that there are more listed on the over 5 list (I believe) but is it still really hard to get heart certificates? Are those results not public also?

I guess the KC ABS (in my opinion) is worthless especially if only requirement to advertise is eyes. I think it's better to go to breed clubs and for them (especially in the USA) give information on questions to ask, health information, are you the right fit for breed, educational stuff.

I think it's more important to look at the breeding and not the breeder but many puppy buyers (unfortunately) don't take time to get to know breeders and educate themselves about the breed. It's heartbreaking but some want a puppy now and will not wait (even if not long) for a puppy.

Why are so many protocols only focused on one or two conditions??? I do not get it when clear documentation of other serious inherited conditions.

I think reading back not the UK is working on an EBV where it does factor in hearts.

Debra,

In the US and I am sure the UK, these are "recommended" protocols. Anyone can register a cavalier with the AKC if they have a pedigree and it only proves they are a purebred Cavalier and nothing to do with health. The parent club (ACKCSC) has recommended protocols. Right now, I went to the website www.ackcsc.org to see what they suggest for puppy buyers. The website did not give me information or it was hard to navigate to find if there. You can buy a puppy buyers guide for $2.00 which I find disappointing. The website did say in the code of ethics

"5. Not breed from any Cavalier known to have inheritable, disqualifying, disabling, or potentially disabling health defects Note: Screening for inherited diseases and health defects is strongly recommended by ACKCSC, Inc. e.g. eye, heart, patellae, and hips"

Now the other breed club www.ckcsc.org has information to ask breeders. I believe we have to understand that the USA has different "recommended" protocols than the UK. For example, the ACKCSC mentions hips and patellas but no SM. Even though some will say more should be on the website or Rod may mention the MVD protocol, in my opinion, the breed clubs is the best place to start.

I feel the more genetic tests and health protocols, the harder it is for breeders. I believe I read that Dr. Jerald Bell said it is his hope that with more testing there will be no "perfect" dog. It would be virtually impossible to have all clear certificates. MVD and CM/SM are two most talked about conditions recently. Many have already been testing eyes and I think they have had success with this. For some conditions it is not easy or they do not have a DNA test, so information on pedigree history and offspring, along with tests, are things they look at. That is why a DNA test would be helpful for the breed because not only is it expensive to scan but still we can only look at guidelines and research we have now. Even with an A to A breeding, 25% could still develop SM. There is a lot of unknowns so I thank the breeders who are submitting results, being open about not only good results, and having the knowledge and education to make these decisions.

I would not want to be a breeder because there is a lot of factors to consider.

I guess the KC ABS (in my opinion) is worthless especially if only requirement to advertise is eyes.

Many of us have been making this point for years–it has been a key argument made by Jemima Harrison and also by many within and outside the clubs who have a concern about puppy farms, because in the past it has been so easy to get this accreditation. And with cavaliers, for only eyes to be on the list is just utterly meaningless. I don't think there is a single respected cavalier breeder at the moment who would think that only testing cavalier eyes makes for a responsible breeder, much less one who is given the imprimatur by the national kennel club, of being somehow particularly health focused (the supposed point of theABS).

Even with an A to A breeding, 25% could still develop SM.

But the alternatives are far, far worse. And as one Griffon breeder has already shown, you can take your dogs from a D grade to producing all A puppies within only a couple of generations. There is plenty of evidence that breeding A to D, or D to D, produces few to no A's.

As for what the breed clubs recommend–the UK club is actually by far the best in making recommendations–what people actually do, of course, is a different situation, and the current national club committee has refused to set even the most minimal example to its members by refusing to commit to its own club's basic recommendations .

The CKCSC using cost as a reason to let breeders off the hook of doing MRIs is totally, ethically corrupt. If people cannot afford the MRIs for this widespread and devastating, painful disease, then they shouldn't be breeding! And I sure don;t see breeders rushing to lower puppy prices simply because lots of people whop would like a cavalier pup cannot afford their dogs... we all have things we wish we could do but cannot afford, and if healthful breeding is beyond someone's means, then they need to get out of cavalier breeding). It is just ridiculous to use cost issues to justify breeding blindly–which is what every breeder who does not MRI is doing. I think you only need to look at how so many of the most skeptical breeders towards MRIs, really changed their view when they started to MRI some of their own dogs and found how many dogs that they were sure were clear actually had syrinxes.

The clubs have also made almost no effort to try to set up low-cost programs or to raise funding to do so in the US. Every low-cost scanning program that I am aware of bar one, was actually driven by either pet owners or a handful of interested researchers/centre owners (and personally, I was involved in the background with 2 of them, that directly benefit breeders, not pet owners. How is it that I can seem to manage to do this from 5000 miles away just through e-mail correspondence, and the breed clubs actually in these locales cannot get these things set up? And the reason that I was the point of contact for these scanning programs was because I, like Rod, actually have plenty of information available on a website about SM and the clubs had pretty much nothing, so the centres thought it better to ask me, rather than the clubs ).

I have absolutely no doubt that if regional or national breed clubs made any meaningful effort at all to organize members to scan and then approached a scanning center, they could negotiate a discount rate. If the breed clubs were liaising closely with researchers and talking to them about their serious concerns about SM, I have no doubt that prices would drop and more research projects would be undertaken in the US as well.

Using the excuse that many people are far away from scanning centers–as stated in this CKCSC breeder questions–is also a nonsense. Not only do most large cities have some kind of MRI center, meaning most people will be less than a day's drive from one, but increasingly, even some large vet practices either have an MRI or make use of a mobile MRI unit. And it is odd that any breed club would make the excuse of the distance breeders would need to travel for an MRI, when the very same breed club members travel enormous distances to attend dog shows.

Plenty of responsible breeders are doing great things to support health in this breed. It's a shame that more of their club members do not listen to them or speak to them–and it's also a shame that in far too many cases, such role models and up being ostracized and in some cases, removed–either directly or indirectly–from committee roles.

What I meant to say, the more tests would make it hard to find a cavalier perfectly "clear". Some may say ask breeders for BAER certificates. Great if a breeder did this test but would I rule a breeder out from buying a puppy without this but followed other protocols and tests? No.

But as the researchers have said over and over–this is already well recognized and nobody is arguing that breeders need to produce only perfect dogs (and they never will anyway–pedigree dogs are going to always risk having breed-related health issues of some sort but a responsible breeder does the testing that enables them to know as best as possible what their breeding dogs are carrying, and then they make an intelligent decision on whether that dog should be used for breeding at all).

The SM breeding guidelines clearly state that the reason it is considered necessary to allow for A to D matings is precisely for this point–that a dog with a very small syrinx and without pain, may nonetheless have, say, an excellent heart. If that dog is, say, an older stud dog who still only has a small syrinx, no pain, and great heart health, then that makes that dog a potentially valuable breeding dog and this totally fits within the SM breeding guidelines (shame more breeders don'I know t actually seem to read them...).

No one I know is arguing that breeders are supposed to produce only dogs that always pass every single test–and at any rate, many of these conditions in Cavaliers only show up when they are older anyway; the whole point is that breeder should at least have dogs that remain clear until age 5 or so to try to push these horrible conditions off so that they are late onset and then more likely to be less serious and less painful.

This argument about 'perfect dogs' is just a breeder red herring, a ridiculous argument that puppy buyers or researchers are trying to "force" them to breed these perfect dogs that will never fail a single test. The fact that it is being mentioned here at all points out how successful a small group are in using this fallacious argument to steer attention away from the fact that so many of them still do not do even the basic tests for the most widespread/devastating health issues–cardiology testing for MVD, and MRI scanning for syringomyelia. Personally, a lot of us would be perfectly happy if breeders were required to do only those 2 tests. The fact that barely over a dozen UK dogs registered to do the genetic test for episodic falling and curly coat, when they had supposedly been saying how much they wanted DNA tests, just underlines that what people say and what they actually mean and do are often very different things.

... Even though some will say more should be on the website or Rod may mention the MVD protocol, in my opinion, the breed clubs is the best place to start.

To start what?

What is on those breed club websites not only is bogus, but their MVD recommendations have been proven not to work! So, do you want to "start" by wasting your time? Or, like most of the breeders in those clubs, do you want to use the clubs' "recommendations" as cover for you not doing what needs to be done?

Originally Posted by anniemac

.. I feel the more genetic tests and health protocols, the harder it is for breeders.

This is pathetic! Boo-hoo to those breeders who don't even try to reduce early-onset MVD in their litters, or don't even try to eliminate SM. It is just too hard for them to try to do that, because there are so many tests! Bull-oney!!! If any cavalier breeder cannot bring herself to follow the essential breeding protocols -- MVD, SM, CERF, hips, patellas -- then she should pack it in and move on to destroying some other breed!